PhilArchive
open access
Kratzerian 'want', decision theory, and upward entailment
Kyle Blumberg has recently argued that (i) the ideal worlds account of desire – according to which for S to want p is for all of S’s top-ranked worlds to be p-worlds – has difficulties accounting for certain cases involving the ascribee’s ignorance. He takes these cases to be (ii) a reason to disprefer the Kratzerian account of ‘want’ to its rivals, and (iii) to doubt that desire ascriptions are upward entailing. I challenge all three claims. Along the way, I motivate and develop a Kratzer-style account, according to which what a subject wants depends not just on their information and preferences, but also on the decision rule they embrace and the salient decision problem.
Conceptio Open Archive
Analyze & explore related research in Conceptio
Connect this record directly into your research workflow or AI agent. Explore citations across open repositories, query full text, and export structured proof bundles.
This document is indexed with metadata only: full text is not available in the archive for this record. Open the official source ↗
Related documents
- Kripke#734812
- Style: should Kripke have avoided “I” in his academic writing?#86883
- _Wittgenstein on Rule Following: A Critical and Comparative Study of Saul Kripke, John McDowell, Peter Winch, and Cora Diamond_#776724
- Undercutting Defeat: When it Happens and Some Implications for Epistemology#706732
- Desiring under the Proper Guise#753724
Record · ID 83369
Retrieved via Conceptio: every document is proof-bundled with source, license, and retrieval metadata.
Retrieved via Conceptio: every document is proof-bundled with source, license, and retrieval metadata.
Bring this data into your agent: Connect via MCP or API · 20 free credits to start · no card required
Read the Docs → · View CLI source on GitHub · Conceptio Open Knowledge Archive
Read the Docs → · View CLI source on GitHub · Conceptio Open Knowledge Archive